One Film, Multiple IPs: Breaking Down the Layers of IP Rights in Cinema

28 May 2026 By parkerip

A film is not one intellectual property. It is a stack of them, each independently owned, separately licensed, and capable of generating its own disputes if poorly structured. Under the Copyright Act, 1957, a single Indian film can contain at least five distinct categories of protected works, each with its own author, its own ownership logic, and its own commercial life.

For producers, distributors, and investors, understanding this structure is not an academic exercise. It is the difference between a clean distribution deal and a legal hold that delays an OTT release by months.

The Five IP Layers in Any Film

1. Literary Works: Script, Screenplay, and Dialogue

The writer is the first owner of a screenplay under Indian law. That ownership does not transfer to a producer simply by virtue of payment or a handshake. It requires a written assignment agreement that is specific about scope, territory, and duration.

In practice, many productions begin shooting before assignment paperwork is finalised. When disputes arise, whether a writer claims they were never properly paid, or that only adaptation rights were granted and not remake rights, the producer may find they do not own the foundation their entire film is built on.

2. Musical Works: Composition and Lyrics

Music in film involves at least two separate rights: the musical composition (owned by the composer) and the lyrics (owned by the lyricist). These are distinct from the sound recording and can be licensed independently.

Crucially, the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 introduced an inalienable royalty right for authors of literary and musical works used in films. This means composers and lyricists are entitled to royalties from commercial exploitation, including streaming, regardless of what an assignment agreement says. Producers cannot contract this right away. Many production contracts written before 2012, or drafted without awareness of the amendment, have since become grounds for royalty disputes.

3. Sound Recordings

The recorded version of a song is a separate IP from the composition itself. Sound recording rights in India are typically held by the producer or, where rights have been sold, by a music label.

This distinction has direct commercial consequences. A streaming platform licensing a film’s music needs rights in the sound recording. A hotel or restaurant playing the same song at an event may require separate licences in the underlying composition and lyrics, typically administered through a collecting society such as IPRS or PPL India.

4. Cinematograph Film

The completed film, as a synchronised audio-visual work, is protected as a cinematograph film under Section 2(f) of the Copyright Act, 1957. The producer is treated as the author of this work and typically holds the primary commercial rights: theatrical release, satellite broadcast, digital streaming, and home video.

This is the asset that distribution agreements, OTT licensing deals, and satellite rights negotiations are built around. Without a clean title to this right, none of those deals can close.

5. Performers’ Rights

Actors, singers, and background musicians hold performers’ rights under Sections 38 to 38B of the Copyright Act, 1957, as amended in 2012. These rights protect their individual performances from unauthorised reproduction or commercial exploitation.

In most commercial productions, performers sign contracts that grant the producer usage rights. However, the 2012 amendments introduced moral rights and certain royalty entitlements for performers that cannot be entirely waived by contract, an area many standard agreements still fail to address properly.

Why IP Mistakes Happen, and What They Actually Cost

Most film IP disputes do not arise from bad faith. They arise from speed and assumption.

Productions move fast. Legal paperwork is often treated as an administrative afterthought rather than a commercial prerequisite. The most common failure points are:

Unsigned or incomplete assignment agreements. A verbal agreement that a writer has “given” their script to a producer has no legal weight. Without a written assignment that covers all modes of exploitation, including digital and remake rights, the producer’s title is incomplete.

Music rights assumed rather than secured. Producers who negotiate a lump-sum payment to a composer and assume that covers everything frequently discover it does not. Composition rights, recording rights, and royalty entitlements are separate questions.

Performers’ rights overlooked in standard contracts. Pre-2012 contract templates, still in circulation, do not account for the amended performers’ rights provisions. Using them creates gaps that can be exploited later.

Third-party content without clearance. A background song playing on a radio in a scene, a poster visible on a wall, a piece of choreography: each of these can constitute infringement if not cleared. OTT platforms conducting due diligence before licensing will flag them.

Assumption that the producer owns everything. The producer owns the cinematograph film. They do not automatically own the underlying literary, musical, or performance rights. Those require separate agreements.

The cost of these mistakes is not abstract. A music rights dispute can block an OTT release. An unresolved script ownership claim can prevent a remake deal. A performer asserting unwaived moral rights can complicate an international distribution agreement.

How Licensing Works Across a Film’s Commercial Life

Each revenue channel a film exploits draws on a different IP layer:

• Theatrical release: cinematograph film rights
• OTT streaming: digital licensing of the film, plus sound recording rights for music
• Satellite broadcast: broadcasting rights
• Music streaming: sound recording rights, separate from the film deal
• Remakes or adaptations: rights in the underlying literary work

This is why a film can be on Netflix while its music is licensed to a different platform, and why a remake requires going back to the original screenplay writer’s estate rather than the producer of the first film.

FAQs

1. Who owns the copyright in a film in India? The producer is the author of the cinematograph film under the Copyright Act, 1957. Ownership of underlying rights, including script, music, and performances, depends on separate contractual assignments.
2. Can a composer or lyricist claim royalties even after assigning their rights? Yes. The Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 grants authors of literary and musical works an inalienable right to royalties from exploitation in films and sound recordings. This cannot be signed away.
3. Are performers’ rights the same as copyright? No. Performers’ rights are a related but distinct category under Sections 38 to 38B of the Copyright Act, 1957. They protect individual performances rather than creative authorship.
4. What happens if a production begins without signed assignment agreements? The producer may not hold clear title to the rights they are commercially exploiting. This creates legal exposure that can surface during distribution due diligence, funding rounds, or if a rights holder later contests the arrangement.
5. Is a music licence from the producer sufficient for all uses? Not necessarily. Theatrical sync, streaming, and live performance may each require different licences from different rights holders. Collecting societies such as IPRS and PPL India administer certain music rights independently of the producer.